Blog powered by Typepad

« Whither India? | Main | Ed Dwight Jnr. - 'hoonoo'? »

Tuesday, 16 July 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm guessing they baited the lion. Then shot him. Or were told the animal was sick and dying or something. The lion is dead. The "hunters" are just empty.

On the assumption that they paid the going rate that's $50,000 they paid for the privilege. Money that funds the game reserve and makes it worthwhile to live next to dangerous predators.
Without fools such as those the game reserve would be turned over to some other use, and the lions shot as pest control.
Sure they're fools, but if the form of their folly contributes to the maintenance of a lion population, then it works out to the.good.
I wonder what the reaction would be if a few lions got loose in England? Actually I don't - a couple of years ago three wolves escaped from a local zoo and were promptly shot. The lions would get the same treatment.

Maybe some lions could be turned loose in Bradford....

Pat, I'm surprised at you! I don't care how much they paid and if they had the slightest regard for wildlife they could have contributed to the cost of the reservation!

Your point concerning dangerous wild animals on the loose in England is silly! Of course they would - and should - be shot assuming there was no way of tranquilising them. There is a difference between killing animals for protection and/or food, and shooting them to boost your ego and doing so without any risk to yourself!

Pat, lions are an endangered species why not target US Democrats as they are in abundance.

This reminded me of an incident on a royal tour of India, Pakistan and surrounding countries. King Mahendra of Nepal had invited the Duke of Edinburgh to a tiger shoot. Doubtless, it was an extension of traditional hospitality but the British papers (some of them, anyway) kicked up a fuss about it and the
Duke's trigger finger became infected by a whitlow. Even at the time, I thought that the whitlow was more a diplomatic than a medical affair. So he never got to shoot the tiger and several official pictures of the Duke in full dress uniform showed him with the trigger finger neatly bandaged.

I looked it up today on the internet - and this all took place in 1961 . At the time I had never heard the word "whitlow" before and had to look it up in
a dead tree dictionary.

I wonder how they both managed to shoot it? Did one of them wound it and the other bravely finished it off? Maybe she snuggled into his manly chest and they both pulled the trigger.

If they are so keen on sharing this loved-up slaughter, they should try shooting the next one from diametrically opposite points. With heavy-calibre automatic weapons.

Completely OT, but I thought it might appeal to your readers Duffers:

Why is it OK to shoot lions in Britain but not in Africa? Why must Africans live with dangerous animals when we won't.

David gone on walkies again?

Pat, why must animals live with dangerous Africans?

Maybe "all concerned" might write Letters To The Editor directed to Florida's government:

The comments to this entry are closed.